Perspectives on COVID-19 testing policies and practices: a qualitative study with scientific advisors and NHS health care workers in England.
COVID-19
Health care settings
Healthcare workers
NHS
Pandemic
Semi-structured interviews
Testing
UK health policy
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 06 2021
24 06 2021
Historique:
received:
23
04
2021
accepted:
10
06
2021
entrez:
25
6
2021
pubmed:
26
6
2021
medline:
1
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
As COVID-19 death rates have risen and health-care systems have experienced increased demand, national testing strategies have come under scrutiny. Utilising qualitative interview data from a larger COVID-19 study, this paper provides insights into influences on and the enactment of national COVID-19 testing strategies for health care workers (HCWs) in English NHS settings during wave one of the COVID-19 pandemic (March-August 2020). Through the findings we aim to inform learning about COVID-19 testing policies and practices; and to inform future pandemic diagnostic preparedness. A remote qualitative, semi-structured longitudinal interview method was employed with a purposive snowball sample of senior scientific advisors to the UK Government on COVID-19, and HCWs employed in NHS primary and secondary health care settings in England. Twenty-four interviews from 13 participants were selected from the larger project dataset using a key term search, as not all of the transcripts contained references to testing. Framework analysis was informed by the non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability of patient-facing health and care technologies implementation framework (NASSS) and by normalisation process theory (NPT). Our account highlights tensions between the communication and implementation of national testing developments; scientific advisor and HCW perceptions about infectiousness; and uncertainties about the responsibility for testing and its implications at the local level. Consideration must be given to the implications of mass NHS staff testing, including the accuracy of information communicated to HCWs; how HCWs interpret, manage, and act on testing guidance; and the influence these have on health care organisations and services.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
As COVID-19 death rates have risen and health-care systems have experienced increased demand, national testing strategies have come under scrutiny. Utilising qualitative interview data from a larger COVID-19 study, this paper provides insights into influences on and the enactment of national COVID-19 testing strategies for health care workers (HCWs) in English NHS settings during wave one of the COVID-19 pandemic (March-August 2020). Through the findings we aim to inform learning about COVID-19 testing policies and practices; and to inform future pandemic diagnostic preparedness.
METHODS
A remote qualitative, semi-structured longitudinal interview method was employed with a purposive snowball sample of senior scientific advisors to the UK Government on COVID-19, and HCWs employed in NHS primary and secondary health care settings in England. Twenty-four interviews from 13 participants were selected from the larger project dataset using a key term search, as not all of the transcripts contained references to testing. Framework analysis was informed by the non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability of patient-facing health and care technologies implementation framework (NASSS) and by normalisation process theory (NPT).
RESULTS
Our account highlights tensions between the communication and implementation of national testing developments; scientific advisor and HCW perceptions about infectiousness; and uncertainties about the responsibility for testing and its implications at the local level.
CONCLUSIONS
Consideration must be given to the implications of mass NHS staff testing, including the accuracy of information communicated to HCWs; how HCWs interpret, manage, and act on testing guidance; and the influence these have on health care organisations and services.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34167491
doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11285-8
pii: 10.1186/s12889-021-11285-8
pmc: PMC8224254
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1216Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_PC_19069
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
Policy Sci. 2020 Apr 18;:1-17
pubmed: 32313308
Health Econ Policy Law. 2020 Aug 19;:1-8
pubmed: 32811590
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Jan 29;4(Suppl 2):e001179
pubmed: 30815287
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 10;15(12):e0242958
pubmed: 33301459
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Nov 01;19(11):e367
pubmed: 29092808
Int J Ment Health Addict. 2021 Jan 7;:1-10
pubmed: 33437225
Radiology. 2020 Aug;296(2):E32-E40
pubmed: 32101510
BMJ. 2020 Apr 8;369:m1403
pubmed: 32269032
Implement Sci. 2013 Feb 13;8:18
pubmed: 23406398
Sci Data. 2020 Oct 8;7(1):345
pubmed: 33033256